▲ | gruez 2 days ago | ||||||||||||||||
>At the time of [1 (your footnote)] the only defendant listed in the matter was Flo, not Facebook, per the cover page of [1], so it is unsurprising that that complaint does not include allegations against Facebook. Are you talking about this? >As one of the largest advertisers in the nation, Facebook knew that the data it received >from Flo Health through the Facebook SDK contained intimate health data. Despite knowing this, >Facebook continued to receive, analyze, and use this information for its own purposes, including >marketing and data analytics. Maybe something came up in discovery that documents the extent of this, but this doesn't really prove much. The plaintiffs are just assuming because there's a clause in ToS saying so, facebook must be using the data for advertising. | |||||||||||||||||
▲ | gpm 2 days ago | parent [-] | ||||||||||||||||
No... In the part of my post that you quoted I'm literally just talking about the cover page of [1] where the defendants are listed, and at the time only Flo is listed. So nothing against Facebook/Meta is being alleged in [1]. They got added to the suit sometime between that document and [3] - at a glance probably as part of consolidating some other case with this one. Reading [1] for allegations against Facebook doesn't make any sense, because it isn't supposed to include those. | |||||||||||||||||
|